- (1.) THE instant writ petition has been filed by 13 petitioners as Public Interest Litigation ('PIL') stating grievance against the mining operations being carried out by the respondent ­ Hindustan Zinc Limited near village Agucha, Tehsil Hurda, District Bhilwara. The petitioners have stated the summary of the cause to maintain this writ petition as PIL in the following: - "Thus, this writ petition in the nature of Public Interest Litigation, is filed by the humble petitioners, who are agriculturists (farmers) residing in village Angucha in Tehsil -Hurda, District Bhilwara, wherein concern of petitioner is about danger to life and liberty of residents of this village and other adjoining villages, due to on going aforesaid blasting carried out for mining operation, by the respondent Company, i.e., Hindustan Zinc Limited (now merged with Vedanta Group of Industries) under Mining Lease, granted by the respondent Mining Department and because of large scale mining operation carried out, contrary to the norms prescribed for extraction of minerals, under the MMRD 1957 and RMMCR 1986, petitioners and other resident farmers of the village Angucha and other adjoining villages are not able to carry out farming in their fields and also their crops in the area is getting destroyed, due to accumulation of dust layer on the crops, causing grave danger to survival of inhabitant of this area. The polluted water is being discharged in the ponds of villages, which serves as source of water to villagers. But, on the representations of petitioners, no action has been taken and the competent authorities of the Pollution Control Board and respondent Mining Department have not taken any action, to redress grievances of petitioners. Hence petitioners, prays for kind intervention of this Hon'ble High Court, in the matter."
(2.) WHILE entertaining this writ petition on 16.05.2012, this Court directed that the respondents shall ensure that no mining operation was carried out in an illegal manner. However, on 11.07.2012, an application (IA No.10707/2012) was filed on behalf of the petitioners supported by their affidavits seeking permission to withdraw while stating that the respondent Hindustan Zinc Limited has dealt with the problems of villagers and their grievances stood redressed. However, on the matter being taken up on 03.12.2012, this Court observed that PIL having been set in motion, relief granted by the respondent was required to be specified on oath.
(3.) THEREAFTER , a detailed affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent No.9 Hindustan Zinc Limited, inter alia, stating that its mining operations are being conducted with the best of technologies and it has received several commendations for the same. While denying the allegations of the petitioners, the respondent has further pointed out that upon clearance of the concerned departments / authorities, its production capacity of mine ore was permitted to be enhanced from 5.00 mtpa to 6.15 mtpa for which, acquiring the surface rights over additional area of approximately 155 ha land situated within the mining lease area was envisaged wherefor, the process of acquisition, as per the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, was set in motion. While giving out the details of its dealings with the petitioners whereby the answering respondent has purportedly purchased the land of all except one of the petitioners by itself or through its employee; and while filing the copies of such registered sale deeds on record, the respondent company has also averred that in respect of the other parcels of land including that of the petitioner No.12, a request has been made to the State Government and the process has been initiated for acquisition. The respondent company has, inter alia, stated as under: - "5. That the answering respondent submits that the petitioners have filed present writ petition without any basis and without any reason. The answering respondent humbly submits that the answering respondent conducting mining operations in its mines with best of the technologies available in the world and for this the answering respondent has been commended by the different forums all over the country and even at the world level. The technique and the systematic mining operations conducted by the answering respondent is an example for the mining industry. The answering respondent's mining activity is equipped with high -tech mining technology and amongst the one of the best technologies available in the world. Therefore, the allegations made in the present writ petition in regard to non -adhering the provisions of the Act of 1957 and the norms of Pollution Control Board and other guidelines issued by the government are totally baseless and non -existent. 6. That the Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of India has granted Environmental Clearance for the enhancement of mine ore production capacity from 5.00 mtpa to 6.15 mtpa for which acquiring the surface rights over additional area of approx 155 Ha land situated within the mining lease area was envisaged. The answering respondent has initiated the process of land acquisition as per the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and submitted the application to Industries Department, Government of Rajasthan on 09.02.2011. That out of the above 158.04 Ha land, the answering respondent to avoid the hurdles in the mining activities and to maintain the harmony and peace in the area nearby mining lease of the answering respondent has purchased the land from different Khatedars (land holders) including 11 petitioners out of the 13 by way of Registered sale deeds and the answering respondent paid market value of the land to the Khatedars. It is pertinent to mention here that petitioner No. 3 Shri Chotuji s/o Mangu Balai, belongs to Schedule Caste Category, therefore, the land owned by him cannot be directly purchased by respondent company so his land was purchased in the name of Shri Arjun Kumar s/o Shri Sita Ram Mandal who is an employee of the respondent company. As far as petitioner No. 12 Shri Radha Kishan S/o Shri Chhoga Lal Brahmin is concerned, despite efforts being made by the answering respondent company to persuade him to sell his holding in favour of answering respondent company by way of private negotiations, he did not agree and, therefore, left with no option, the respondent company made a request to the State Government for acquiring his holding also for the company. The process for acquiring this land in terms of the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 has been initiated and the State Government has also issued notification for remaining 120.50 Ha land including holding of petitioner no. 12 under Section 4 of the said Act on 17.06.2013. It may be stated that the respondent company is engaged in the production of zinc, lead and associated minerals, which are of vital public importance in as much as its products are inter alia being used for manufacturing of various medicines. Therefore, to redress the grievance of the petitioners, the answering respondent has taken the above mentioned measures and for that full consideration and the market rate has been paid to the sellers and in respect of the land being acquired, compensation as determined by the Land Acquisition Officer in terms of section 23 of the Act of 1894, will be paid to petitioner no. 12. It is also relevant to submit here that after purchasing the land of most of the petitioners, the grievances which were not in existence but for maintaining and conducting peaceful mining activities, the answering respondent has taken this step. The copies of registered sale -deeds except the petitioner no. 12 are submitted herewith and marked as Annexure -R9/1 collectively. A perusal of the sale -deeds will reveal that the lands of all the petitioners except the petitioner no. 12 situated in the vicinity of the mines of the answering respondent had been purchased by the answering respondent. Therefore, the grievances of the petitioners have been redressed." ;